UNION OF INDIA Vs. LABOUR COURT HIMAYATNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to quash the order dated 9-11-1976 of the Labour Court, Hyderabad, in Central Miscellaneous Petition No. 74/1975 granting family pension to the 2nd respondent Smt. B. Lakshmamma, widow of late B.N. Ramulu, who was employed as Turner in the Signal and Telecommunication Workshop, South Central Railway, Secunderabad.

(2.) The facts are as follows:- The second respondent's husband late B. N. Ramulu, was employed as a casual turner on daily rate, with effect from 16-11-1960, in the Signal and Telecommunication workshop of the South Central Railway, Mettuguda, Secunderabad. He Was conferred temporary status on 28-9-1961. He died on 8-4-1969. At the time of his death, he was drawing Rs. 128/- towards pay, and Rs. 70/-per month towards dearness allowance. The 2nd respondent (the widow of late Ramulu) who is his only legal heir, filed s petition under Section 33-C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (hereinafter called the Act), claiming family pension at the rate of Rs. 99/- per month from 8-4-1969; to 7-4-1976; and at the rate of Rs. 60/- per month thereafter during her lifetime. To this petition, (1) the General Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad, (2) The Deputy Chief Signal and Telecommunications Engineer, S & T Workshops' South Central Railway, and (3) the Senior Accounts Officer, Stores and Workshops, South Central Railway, Secunderabad, were impleaded as respondents 1 to 3.

(3.) The Deputy Chief Signal and Telecommunications Engineer, filed an affidavit stating that the application under Sec. 33-C(2) of the Act, was not maintainable, and secondly, that late Ramulu was employed only as a causal turner on daily rate on 16-11-1960 and was conferred the temporary status, on 28-9-1961, that he died while he was in that temporary status, that as an employee who attained a temporary status, he would be entitled to the rights and privileges of a temporary employee except the retirement benefits, that according 10 paragraph 2514 of the Railway Establishment Manual, services prior to absorption against regular temporary/permanent post after requisite selection, would not constitute qualifying service for pensionary benefits. and this was also recognised in Paragraph 104(2) of the Manual of Pension Rules of 1950, and that as the deceased husband of the 2nd respondent, was not entitled to any pension, the 2nd respondent also would not be entitled to claim any family pension.